Summary Of Power And The Presidency By Robert Dallek

In this essay, I will be writing about how the power relationship between the United States Congress and the presidency has changed during the past two hundred years. I will be talking about how the executive branch is more powerful than the legislative branch and how the changing relationship between Congress and the president affected American democracy in a good way.

We all know the president as the leader of our country, but we never really consider the many things that encompasses. He must be a Chief of State, a Chief Executive, a Commander in Chief, a Chief Diplomat, a Chief Legislator, and other various smaller roles. The President has many roles to take on and must act as all of them possibly in any given week or day. Taking a look at four random weeks in The President’s schedule I am going to identify examples of the president executing these roles, explaining why he was more active in certain roles, and why some roles are absent during these weeks.

Many argue that the most powerful branch in government is the Executive Branch. The President is considered as the most influential and the most important position in the U.S. government. However, the powers granted to Presidents and the prerogative they have exerted are not listed in the Constitution but instead have been adapted and expanded upon by each President. Although the Constitution does not define the powers of the President, it has defined Presidential powers in terms of peace, war, and emergency. A recent expansion of Presidential power, exerted by Bush and then Obama was this “War on Terror (WOT)”. President Barack Obama and his predecessor President George W. Bush have both expanded the powers of the President through the

The presidency has been titled the most prestigious executive position in the United States of America, yet it is the most restricted. Presidents possess vast formal powers, nonetheless these powers are restricted due to constitutional check and balances. Article II of the constitution contains the constitutional powers of the government, which delivers the method of election, and provide a permanent four year term. When reading the 2nd Article of the Constitution, many are struck by how much attention is given to the process of the presidential election, and the slight attention paid to the powers of the president once in office. Factually, several presidents have taken a restrictive view of their duties, and the process through which a president is nominated and

Throughout the book Congress: The Electoral Connection there is a common theme that the author, David Mayhew, brings to our attention. He argues that the members of Congress have one exclusive goal, to get reelected; because of this goal, it effects their behavior and actions during their time in office. There are four reasons that Mayhew puts an emphasis on the goal of reelection, those being political reality, the lack of focus on parties but rather on individuals, the constant struggle for power and, in his opinion, most importantly it establishes an accountability relationship with an electorate. As the book progresses Mayhew provides an abundance of evidence as to why he believes this is the primary goal of the members of Congress.

Being the president of the United States is one of the most prestigious and difficult jobs. The fate of millions of people rests in their hands. The president is the leader of their country. A good leader can bring prosperity wile a bad leader could bring death to a nation. James David Barbers article, “The Presidential Character: Predicting Performance in the White House” addresses types of leadership and how the president’s personality can affect their success in office. The premise of Barber's argument in The Presidential Character is that he believes presidential personalities fall into four categories and combinations of activity, passivity, positivity, and negativity and those personality combinations can be indicative of presidential performance.

The President is a special position with special powers especially the US president. My initial wonder has always been why would someone run for the president of a country and what actually made someone like President Obama run for the presidency of the US. Even though none of this week’s reading focused on that. Nevertheless, there were interesting dimensions to the readings on the topic.

Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, presidential powers have been a massive controversy on whether the powers are expanding in the nation’s best interest or if the President is accumulating too much power in the government. In Christina Lyons article, Presidential Power, she develops a historical scope of past presidential powers, ranging from Reagan to Obama. Also, Lyons discusses the many issues arising of whether the President is in need of constrictions and restrictions on the executive powers or if Congress has put a big enough indentation on these powers since September 1st, 2001 terrorist attack against the United States of America. Lyons examines the reasons behind presidents expanding their powers throughout the past two centuries, which recent terrorists attacks and congressional gridlocking play a major role. She provides specific types of executive actions that recent presidents have used to exert their powers, like President Bush, President Obama, and President Clinton. Lyons stipulates arguments of those who are opposed to expanded presidential powers, for example, setting policy for the country. Lastly, the author observes the Constitutional provisions of checks and balances between the executive, judicial, and legislative branches in constraining presidential power.

Both the administration of Carter and Reagan were shaped by the Cold War in the aftermath of Watergate. Watergate created cynicism of the government, which in turn made governing difficult both intentionally as well as improvisational because the institution of the President was seen as acting in the best interest of itself. President Jimmy Carter and President Ronald Reagan both had their difficulties as President. Carter had terrible problems with economics as our country underwent high unemployment as well as many other economic problems. Reagan was one of the unfortunate Presidents that had to deal with assassination attempts. Both Presidents had great accomplishments both foreign and domestic. Carter

A powerless painter who painted the president. The article “Kehinde Wiley on Painting the Powerless and a President” by Farah Nayeri showcases the recent success of artist Kehinde Wiley. Wiley is respected as a living legend, having a painting in every major gallery in America. The author is sure to broadcast this by describing Wiley’s early life, big inspirations, and recent achievements.

The views of the presidency by the first sixteen presidents varied widely but all of their actions set precedents for their successors to use, expand, or even curtail the power of the office. Some believed in the Whig theory of strict adherence to the constitution, while others believed the president was the steward of the people with a loose interpretation of it. The power of the office expanded through the years, however it only expanded as far as the public and congress allowed.

The modern presidency has in a sense become a double-edged sword in that presidents have become beneficiaries of anything positive that can be attributed to government, but also can be blamed for anything bad occurring in society. Quite simply, the modern president has become the center of our political system (The Modern Presidency, 2004). The men who have dealt with this double-edged sword known as the modern presidency have often walked a very fine line between effectiveness and ineffectiveness, but all have attempted to use their power in one way or another.

The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be

The separation of power throughout the united states government prevents one part of the government from becoming so strong that it can infringe on the freedom of the governed (Bernstein 24). The united states government is a representative republic. A representative republic is a type of democracy where the people elect representatives to vote for them in the nations matters, rather than having every person vote on every single election and issue. The U.S. government is separated into three main branches, the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. Each branch has its own powers and weaknesses and they must all work together to govern the country (Bernstein 24).

In order to answer the question “Can we have too many rights?” There are many things that we must consider, first we must be able to define exactly what rights are, how they work and what they do for citizens and then further into Political and civil rights in the same way as both are essential to the structure of a democracy and play very important roles in enabling citizens to take part in politics and help structure their democracy into something that is for the better. We will also closely examine Robert Dahl, Democracy and its Critics, by first going into a brief description of his opinions in chapters 12 and 13 relating to democracy and how rights affect it. Finally we will deconstruct that argument and find the weaknesses and strengths of his said opinion and come to a conclusion to our original question “Can we have too many rights”